


Valentine's Day: A Demonic Defence

by loveneedlesandhay



Series: Wicked Living: A Lifestyle Blog by Anthony J Crowley [4]
Category: Good Omens (TV), Good Omens - Neil Gaiman & Terry Pratchett
Genre: Crowley Attempts To Explain Human Customs, Crowley is Bad at Being a Demon (Good Omens), Digital Art, Ineffable Husbands (Good Omens), M/M, Wicked Living: A Lifestyle Blog by Anthony J Crowley, valentines day
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2021-02-15
Updated: 2021-02-15
Packaged: 2021-03-16 04:55:23
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 2,721
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/29448138
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/loveneedlesandhay/pseuds/loveneedlesandhay
Summary: It has come to my attention that Hell is labouring under a number of misapprehensions about the human holiday known as "Valentine's Day." Thus, I, Anthony J Crowley, Expert Demon Expert on Human Customs, have prepared this extraordinarily accurate explanation of all you truly need to know about the day.You're welcome.
Relationships: Aziraphale/Crowley (Good Omens)
Series: Wicked Living: A Lifestyle Blog by Anthony J Crowley [4]
Series URL: https://archiveofourown.org/series/2104008
Comments: 35
Kudos: 68





	Valentine's Day: A Demonic Defence

Look, I know. I know _exactly_ what face you’re making. I know you’re muttering “ _How can youcall yourself a_ ** _demon_** _and defend sodding_ ** _Valentine’s Day_** _in the same breath?_ ” And I know where you’re coming from, too. You think it’s about _luurrrrve_ , ugh, and _affection_. S’gotta be a one of Upstairs’s holidays, too, what with the white winged wankers everywhere, and it’s named for a bloody _saint_ , even! A bleeding _martyr_!

_Image description: a bunch of angelic Valentines. Ugh, amirite?_

Thing is, though, everything you _think_ you know about Valentine’s Day is a lie. Complete and total fabrication. Luckily, I’m here to set you right. The truth is that observing Valentine’s Day is not only _not_ undemonic—if you truly commit, this so-called _holy_ -day can be downright _diabolical_.

* * *

**The Historical Defence**

Here’s the thing about the history of Valentine’s day: There isn’t one.

There’s a bunch of theories and whatever, but they’re all bollocks. And if you think about it, that’s demonic in itself, you know. It’s all false, false things are bad, and that makes it good. For demons. Don’t think about it too hard, just trust me. The only real history of Valentine’s day is centuries of people making up nonsense as an excuse to get laid.

You want more details? You got ‘em. It goes like this:

Some human named Valentinus may or may not have existed in the third century AD. Lived somewhere in Italy, maybe Rome, maybe not. Might have been a priest, or a bishop. Or there could be two different people with the same name. Regardless, the important Romans were still pagans then, and so, they might have had a Christian guy named Valentinus killed for … something. Couple hundred years later, this one pope declared that this alleged Valentinus—who’s apparently a Saint now—died in the middle of February, so that day is now his feast day. There’s nothing special about it; he’s just some guy, and it’s an average saints day.

Then suddenly—a thousand years later—it isn’t. Suddenly the day means something else.

Here’s where all the rubbish comes in. Someone has decided that this day is now meant to celebrate _romance_ , even though there’s no good reason why that should happen. Someone tries to explain that the association is because it’s replacing a pagan festival related to sex that was held on the same date . S’not true. Someone says it’s because Valentine was martyr because he went around marrying soldiers. Also not true. Someone says it’s because our good old Saint-Priest-Bishop Valentinus himself fell in love with his jailer’s daughter and sent her a romantic letter before he croaked. Also totally untrue, and it’s _hilarious_ that people said it, because _he wasn’t supposed to do that! “_ Oh, it’s so _romaaaaaaaantic_ , this priest was supposed to only be married to the Church, but instead, he loved a woman! Let’s make him a Saint!”

There’s a bunch of stuff about birds, too, but you don’t care about that, it gets weird. Anyway, at some point during the last thousand years, humans started claiming the day was for the celebration of love, which is also a lie, because it’s _actually_ about sex, disappointment, pettiness, and hypocrisy. And with the way contemporary humans celebrate it, they’re pretty much knocking out all Seven of the Deadlies in one go.

* * *

**Modern V-Day Traditions, Explained**

You’ve still got questions? Fair enough. I’ve got answers.

**Q: If it’s so sinful, why are angels a symbol on Valentine’s Day?**

A: They aren’t. Well, they sort of are, but not in a _good_ way. Take a closer look at the whitewings on the picture from before. Notice anything strange about them? No, not about the wings themselves, you gits, about the _angels_. No? I’ll spell it out for you, then. I gotta do all the work around here.

They’re not _supposed_ to be angels. They’re cupids. They’re cherubs, not cherubim. There’s a difference. A big, big difference.

Yes, the _size_ is the difference. Finally caught on, did you?

Moving along, then. They weren’t originally supposed to be angels at all. They’re supposed to represent Cupid, aka Eros, who they think of as a winged baby god who goes about shooting random people with arrows to make them fall in obsessive lust for each other. And that is _ridiculous._ Humans have attributed romantic and sexual attraction to a rampaging infant abomination, who wears a fucking _nappy,_ and flits around, _puncturing_ people for fun. It’s absurd.

The really hilarious thing, though, is that the humans actually confuse these “cupids” with angels, too. They don’t draw angels with the wheels and the eyes and the swords anymore. No, now it’s all chubby cheeks and featherbrains and diapers. The Valentine angel is a mockery of those puffy-headed prats. It’s the graven image of an affront to Heaven. And I think that’s _beautiful_.

I mean, really. Imagine—or, um, just try to think really hard—how Gabriel would squawk if he saw his prat self depicted wearing a nappy, like he can’t say more than “goo gee gah goo.” Think about how offended and huffy he would be. Think about hordes of baby angels lined up for battle squeaking “be not _afwaaaaid_.”

So hypothetically, if a demon were to have, say, accidentally inspired humans to put “angels” all over the place every Valentine’s day, then that demon is _definitely_ a diabolical _genius_ who’s done more to destroy Heaven’s morale than anyone else has managed in the last six millennia, and you should be thanking him.

**Q. You said it’s not about love, but the word is all over everything.**

A: Not a question, but whatever. Yeah, they say it’s about love. But the whole thing is so commercialised that the concept of “love” is now meaningless. Humans are very, very bad at identifying love and showing love because they now believe that being in love means doing a whole pile of things that make heaps of people miserable, including themselves. Consider the following list of traditional Valentine’s Day gifts, and their consequences:

 **Chocolate**. Specifically, low-quality chocolate which is 500% more expensive than usual because it’s in a worthless, inconveniently shaped box. It is impossible to identify the flavour of each chocolate because the box guide is always missing or wrong. Some brilliant serpentine demon, who shall remain nameless, worked out how to make it so that everyone’s least favourite chocolate looks almost exactly like their their most favourite, so there’s a 50-50 chance the giftee is gonna make a disgusted face and spit out the first bite, offending the gifter and dooming themselves to be haunted by a flavour they abhor for the rest of the night.

 **Candy hearts.** These are one of the most disgusting substances ever developed. They taste awful, they're somehow hard enough to break your teeth, and half of them are so badly misprinted that you can't read the really inane messages at all. You'd love them down there. I'll send you some.

 **Novelty stuffed toys.** No one wants these. They have absolutely no functional purpose. All they do is occupy space and accumulate dust, and they’re usually hideous, or inconveniently gigantic, or both. Nevertheless, the giftee is required to pretend to treasure the stuffy they’ve been given for the entire duration of the relationship. If they do not display it, the gifter will, again, be offended. Disposing of the toy often triggers a relationship-ending argument, during which both parties will comport themselves like immature arseholes, displaying **Wrath**.

 **Roses.** Theoretically other flowers, but even if the giftee hates roses, the gifter will be judgedand condemned for failing on Valentine’s if they purchase something unexpected. Anyway, humans believe that giving someone else a bouquet of mutilated stems symbolises love. Even though they were almost certainly unethically grown. And cut. Oh, and they’re definitely going to wither and decay. They’ll either end up a fragile, desiccated pile of leaves and petals, or they’ll rot, go all mushy, and smell worse than Hastur after he’s been for a fresh wallow in the sewers. Roses are a symbol of mortality, not love. There’s no two ways about it - they symbolise a slow, ignoble, inevitable death. What they actually communicate is:

****

_Image Description: Valentine reading "Roses are red/ violets are blue/ you're going to die/ our relationship too"_

**Jewellery**. Social expectations state this should be expensive, “tasteful,” and contain diamonds. You may think jewellery is just shiny rocks, but every possible choice a human could make about giving someone else jewellery on Valentine’s day can—and almost always does—involve _disastrous_ outcomes. To start, people are expected to spend far, far more than they can actually afford on jewellery that is worth far, far less than its actual price. They’re also supposed to _guess_ what the other person wants. If by some miracle they get it right and the other person is pleased with it, the recipient is practically guaranteed to slip directly into **Pride** , and then they ostentatiously show off their bauble, communicating “I’ve got more than you do, peasants” to the rest of the world. That triggers **Envy** , not to mention **Coveting**! But if the gifter gets it wrong, that means they’ve insulted the other person, who then is entitled to throw a temper tantrum and hate them. There’s also lots of really common, really tacky jewellery, and all people either love it or loathe it, so whether you buy it or not, someone is guaranteed to judge you and despise you for the decision.

Then there’s the gemstone factor. Most diamonds are produced through large-scale, totally evil enterprises. That’s just a thing. There’s no denying it. If you don’t believe me, then, well, just … go read my report about De Beers. I’ve already done the work of telling you all the disgusting, torturous details once, so I’m not going to do it again. Not because I don’t like talking about it. Totally comfortable with human atrocity, me. Anyway. Thing is, there’s actually another option that’s way more … _fun_. Yes. Diabolically crafty, too. Because there’s options other than traditional diamonds, you see. You’ve got your supposedly conflict and blood free ones, you’ve got your lab-grown ones, you’ve got cubic zirconia, you’ve got vintage diamonds, you’ve other shiny rocks altogether. The key is, though, to adopt and constantly share, at a very high volume and in a superior tone, a strongly held conviction that one option is the “right” choice and that anyone who picks something _else_ is more revolting than the most foetid scum festering beneath the Earth. That’s _not_ a compliment to humans, which means that BANG!, suddenly you’ve got a friendship-destroying **Wrath** -filled screaming match that will leave both parties feeling angry, guilty, spiteful, and bitter. Bonus—humans tend to form strong memory associations with items and hold on to grudges for a “long” time (relative to their lifespan, of course), so they may literally be reminded of that fight every time they look at the jewellery from then on!

**Q. But isn’t the day also celebrated by doing, eugh, _nice_ things for other people?**

That’s the clever bit, though. All paths on Valentine’s Day eventually lead to **Sin**. For example, say you take your _sweetie-pie_ out for a nice meal. First, to get a reservation on Valentine’s Day, humans must plan so far ahead that it actually overwhelms them. This is a trap that diverts many people directly into **Sloth** , and when those people admit they were too lazy to do this one simple thing, their partner either joins them in **Sloth** , or is hurt, offended, and/or **Wrathful**.

But say one does follow through, schedules a meal for two at a swanky place on the big day. That restaurant will be overwhelmed with far more customers than normal, many of whom are feeling particularly uptight and **Prideful** and expect everything to conform to their unreasonable expectations of perfection. These people are impossible to satisfy, so you’re statistically guaranteed that at least five tables will have a conniption fit over some utterly inconsequential thing, probably ruining the night for everyone in a five-block radius. We’ve got more **Wrath** , then, as well as **Envy** from the people who _wanted_ to go to that restaurant, but couldn’t get in!

On the other hand, there’s the unlikely event that everyone behaves themselves, and all diners get to enjoy their meals. There’s a catch, though. Valentine’s day is _expensive_. Needlessly so. Restaurants—owners, not workers, of course—make a _killing_ that day, because they’re driven by an overwhelming sense of **Greed**. They hike the prices up, charge extra for less food than normal, just because there’s candles and mood lighting and plates are fancier and everything is topped with fish eggs, or something. Mollusc snot. Fungus lumps. And you’re going to want to get a posh bottle of something bubbly, too. You can’t buy it by the glass, just the bottle. So you walk into a restaurant, sit down, and look at the menu, and realise it’s going to cost ~~an arm and a leg~~ a whole lot of money _(please, guys, learn how idioms work)_. This leads directly to **Gluttony** , because if you’ve got to spend all that cash, you might as well get your money’s worth! You’ll wind up consuming way, way more than you need, because you're thinking you’ve paid so much for it, andyou’d better enjoy it _all_!

The Valentine’s Day meal is also one of the most traditional settings for the marriage proposal. This is a triple whammy of **Pride** , **Envy** , and **Greed** all at once! **Pride** , if you’re using this public proposal to show off your relationship or income. **Greed** , if the propose-ee is mostly interested in the size of the ring. **Envy** , if the people watching want a proposal—or a shiny ring, or one of the people involved—and don’t have it!

Oh, yeah, and **Lust**. There’s so much of that everywhere that I don’t even know what to sayabout it. Just spend ten minutes or so watching Valentine’s Day commercials. You’re not going to understand the message, because it’s really illogical—there's nothing less sexy than perfunctory, requisite copulation, which is what humans collectively seem to believe sex _is_ on Valentine’s—but all the same, you’ll see it. The whole day is about squishing bits of your anatomy together with someone else’s, ergo, **Lust**.

**Q. What about the hearts everywhere, though?**

A.Look, why are you assuming this shape ❤️ means both “heart” and “love”? Shapes are totally arbitrary, and _you_ don’t know why humans put them all over everything. Anyway, the heart is just a squishy muscle meant for circulating blood. Humans tend to die without it, yes, but it’s got _nothing_ to do with emotions, not really. “I ❤️ U” could just as easily be literal as romantic. Could be a threat. “You’ve stolen my heart.” _That’s_ just an accusation. And look, the thing _doesn’t even look like a heart_. Real hearts look like fist-shaped blobs. This ❤️ might actually depict a misshapen kidney. Or upside down bollocks! Yeah, it’s definitely that. It’s just a scrotum. So that’s **Lust** again. Sothere you have it. ❤️ is just a lusty threat. That totally makes sense. Don't question me.

**Q. Okay, but—**

A. Look. Just accept it. If there is a hypothetical, super stylish, heart-shaped-sunglasses-wearing demon who waltzes up to an angel’s bookshop wearing an impeccably tailored outfit that makes his arse look _delectable_ , who gives the angel a card covered in hearts and cherubs, extremely fancy chocolate, a plush stuffed snake, a whole room full of roses, and blindingly sparkly cufflinks, and then whisks the angel away for a miraculously perfect, luxurious meal consisting of all of the angel’s favourite human delicacies, which is followed by a night of passionate, tender, yet _very_ kinky love-making under the stars, and that happens to accidentally overwhelm the angel’s control over his love-related-blessing abilities, thus resulting humans discovering their soulmates en masse, recovering from heartbreak, renewing their commitment to relationships, and feeling general contentment with the world, then that demon has actually just carried off one of the most astonishingly successful temptations of all time and you’re all just jealous.

Lots of _love_ ,

Anthony J Crowley

_Image description: a very smug snake in the shape of a heart, wearing heart-shaped sunglasses._

**Author's Note:**

> Very convincingly argued, I think you'll agree.


End file.
